By Any Name Illegal and Immoral: Response to "Israel's Policy of Targeted Killing"[Abstract]

Ethics & International Affairs, Volume 17.1 (Spring 2003)

Since November 2000, Israel has been implementing an assassination policy in the
occupied territories. The Israeli policy is both illegal and immoral. The legal
questions are much more complicated than would appear from David’s argument.
Although individual killings may be lawful in specific cases, this debate
concerns a policy providing systematic justification for such acts. Neither
international nor Israeli law ensures any backing for this policy. Armed
Palestinians are not combatants according to any known legal definition. They
are civilians––which is the only legal alternative––and can only be attacked for
as long as they actively participate in hostilities.

The argument that this policy affords the public a sense of revenge and
retribution could serve to justify acts both illegal and immoral. Clearly,
lawbreakers ought to be punished. Yet, no matter how horrific their deeds, as
the targeting of Israeli civilians indeed is, they should be punished according
to the law. David’s arguments could, in principle, justify the abolition of
formal legal systems altogether.

The Israeli government has not endorsed the minor changes of policy that
David suggests, and for a reason. Israel’s initial refusal to acknowledge the
very existence of this policy and even its later hesitant admission suggest it
is aware of the problems the policy entails and of the difficulties of
dismissing them. Assassinations have been part of Israel’s security policy for
many years, and Israel is currently the only democratic country that regards
such measures as legitimate. The Palestinian violations of international law,
however, cannot be used to grant legal and/or moral legitimation to these
violations when perpetrated by others.